Date: Thu, 4 Dec 1997 05:08:31 -0800 (PST) From: asami@cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami) To: stefan@promo.de Cc: ports@FreeBSD.ORG, frankch@waru.life.nthu.edu.tw Subject: Re: ports/5214: New port rasmol Message-ID: <199712041308.FAA17225@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU> In-Reply-To: <l03130300b0ac55ffb48f@[194.45.188.81]> (message from Stefan Bethke on Thu, 4 Dec 1997 13:55:20 %2B0100)
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* How about 'visualization' or, even more generic, 'scientific'? I'm not
* sure, but I feel that there might not be that many bio programs; however,
* there are probably a lot of visualization tools, and even more scientific
* ones.
"scientific" is way too generic. We already have "astro" and "math",
which I think are two of the best categories in terms of easy
separation with others.
As for "visualization", I'm sorry but I can't tell what that means.
Also, the porter (in private mail) mentioned that he has a lot more
biology-related ports waiting in the wings.
* The more categories we have, the harder it gets to look for software one
* might use to solve a particular problem. Also, introducing many highly
* specialized categories ('physics', 'chemistry', ...) will make the list of
* categories even longer, and I think it is fairly long already.
I disagree. The more highly specialized categories we have, the
easier for people to find a port for a specific interest. Having
generic categories that overlap each other too much is
counter-productive. When's the last time people complained that they
can't find xephem in astro or linpack in math? Yet people are always
confused about xdvi being in print and xpdf being in graphics.
Satoshi
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199712041308.FAA17225>